The articles in this column are transcriptions and adaptations of shiurim by Rav Joseph Ber Soloveitchik, zt”l. The Rav’s unique perspective on Chumash permeated many of the shiurim and lectures he presented at various venues over a 40-plus-year period. His words add an important perspective that makes the Chumash in particular, and our tradition in general, vibrant and relevant to our generation.
Mazal tov to Yosef Tenure HaKohen Goldblatt on his bar mitzvah. Special mazal tov to great grandmother Rebbetzin Leona Bomzer.
Rashi quotes the Midrash that the story of the spies is juxtaposed to the story of Miriam’s leprosy to teach us that the spies should have learned a lesson from Miriam regarding the hazards of slander. The Torah tells us to remember, not to forget, what happened to Miriam on our journey from Egypt. This is one of the six Zichronot that we recite daily. Rashi interprets that the underlying basis of this command is slander, to remember the Miriam episode so you will not engage in slander as Miriam did against Moshe. Why did the Torah single out slander in this way? How does it differ from other interpersonal commands, mitzvot bein adam l’chavayro? Why did the Torah deem it necessary to include the Miriam incident among the greatest incidents of Jewish history that we must always remember? Prima facie it was an insignificant episode, not comparable with the events at Sinai or the Exodus itself or the creation of the world and the Sabbath. We must examine what Miriam and Aaron did.
Rambam in his introduction to Zeraim has a section entitled interpretations of Torah transmitted by Moshe. He says that we must interpret the text in the way that the Kabbalah tells us. Usually we have great latitude in interpreting the Torah. However we don’t enjoy that freedom with certain parshiyos. For example, an eye for an eye according to Chazal refers to monetary compensation. I have no right to interpret it literally, in a way that differs from the Kabbalah. Similarly, if someone would interpret pri eitz hadar as any beautiful fruit other than an Esrog, according to Rambam he would commit heresy. V’katzosa kappa does not mean we cut off her hand; rather it refers to monetary compensation for shaming the protagonist. The Rav said he heard from his father in the name of Reb Chaim Brisker that the parshah of Miriam should be included in this group that may only be interpreted according to the Kabbalah. We must interpret the entire story of how Aaron and Miriam spoke about the Isha Kushis that Moshe married.
The word kushis refers to Tzippora’s uniqueness, her singular beauty and character. While kushis can mean black, we also find it being used by the prophet who refers to the Jewish people as Halo k’bnay kushiim atem li, you are a unique, singular people unto Me. Chazal say that Moshe divorced his wife after the Asseret HaDibrot, when he was commanded to send the people back to their tents. Moshe was commanded to remain with Hashem. Moshe could not return to his regular, earthly life. Aaron and Miriam felt that he should have continued the marriage, that the separation from Tzippora was unfair and uncalled for. They questioned the possibility that Hashem ordered Moshe to separate from his wife, saying they were prophets as well, that Hashem spoke with them too, and they were not commanded to separate from their spouses. Why should Moshe be different?
Hashem confronted Aaron and Moshe telling them that He speaks to Moshe face to face and that he is His trusted servant. How did this answer their question? They failed to recognize that besides his unique saintliness and kindness, Moshe was completely different. They were unaware of the distinction, the singularity of Moshes prophecy relative to the prophecy of all other prophets, including themselves. In failing to recognize this uniqueness, they argued that Hashem spoke to them as well. They thought that apparently Hashem does not approve of a life of abstinence and separation.